From: wsherman@ncsa.uiuc.edu (William R Sherman)
Subject: Re: INDUSTRY: Terminology - SID or SID?
Date: 9 Mar 1997 03:10:37 GMT
Message-ID: <5ft9nd$lgp@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>
Organization: National Center for Supercomputing Applications


In article <...>, edlantz@aol.com (Edlantz) writes:
> 
> Terminology:  Spatially Immersive Display versus Stationary Immersive
> Display
> 
> Last year I chaired a SIGGRAPH panel entitled "The Future of VR: Head
> Mounted Displays versus Spatially Immersive Displays."  I created the term
> "Spatially Immersive Display" (SID) because such displays were
> ill-defined.  Terms in the VR literature included "Walk-In Immersive
> Display," "Panoramic Display," "Dome Display," "Projection-Based VR
> Display," "CAB Display," "Simulator Display," "CAVE," "Virtual Environment
> Theater," etc.  My definition of SIDs is as follows:

In my taxonomy of visual display paradigms for VR, I break it
down into stationary/tracked moving displays.  Where tracked
moving displays include head-based and palm-based, etc displays.
Stationary displays can be projection-based - eg.  CAVEs(tm),
ImmersaDesks(tm), Immersive Workbenches(tm), etc. or monitor
based - eg. Fishtank VR.  The main difference of course is
how much field of view is covered.

> Well, I am writing an article for Siggraph's Computer Graphics and am
> re-visiting this terminology.  I have not been satisfied with the term
> "Spatially Immersive" since it is ambiguous - does it mean spatial in
> the physical or VE sense?  This is certainly a valid class of
> displays, regardless of what we call it.  The term SID has really not
> been published much as far as I know.  Toni Emerson's FAQ on this
> newsgroup regarding Visual Displays lists SIDs under Stationary
> Displays.  I am considering adopting the term "Stationary Immersive
> Display" for my article, allowing me to keep the SID acronym.

Well, even though you used SID before, I'm not sure that's a good
reason to keep it.  There are a couple of reasons why I'm not
fond of the acronym: 1) it's the same as another acronym in
the display industry (forget what it stands for though); and
2) it reminds me of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, which has
the similar acryonym SIDS, which is only slightly distinguishable
from the plural of SID - SIDs.

> While
> such displays may not always be stationary (as on a simulator ride),
> this is a minor point and I believe it is the best term so far.  The
> term has a clear, un-ambiguous meaning.  It also encompasses the full
> range of display types into a single class according to the definition
> above.

I agree with you here.  I didn't really like Mark & Steve's new
acronym either - sorry guys.

> Before this article goes to publication, I would like to open up the topic
> for input from the VR community.  Please post or email your responses to
> Edlantz@aol.com.  Many thanks.

I can give you a reference too, though it won't be published until
the Summer.

[...]

	Bill

/*************************************************************************/
/* Bill Sherman	 (wsherman@ncsa.uiuc.edu)                                */
/* National Center for Supercomputing Applications                       */
/* University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign                            */
/*     Og - "You want to do mankind a real service?  Tell funnier jokes" */
/*  Spinner - "but facts don't always reveal the truth"                  */
/*      Robin - "Yeah, but I always figure that's the writers' fault"    */
/*************************************************************************/